Alittle something of interest

[nephilimiyr]

I came across this article and thought of this forum right away. It's about how scientists are discovering man and chimp are alot more different than what they thought.

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,57892,00.html

 

[seebs]

The Wired article is giving a pretty bad summary. A better one would be "new technology allows study of different kinds of differences". In fact, the net result is that we're learning more about the *kinds* of changes that occur, and getting a lot of insight into this... But all of this information supports the claim that primates have common ancestry, because now we can trace the larger-scale changes and reorderings in the genome. No prizes for guessing what result that produces - it's the same result we've gotten from everything else.

 

[Andrew]

I came across this article and thought of this forum right away. It's about how scientists are discovering man and chimp are alot moreÊdifferent than what they thought.

boy, somehow I knew I was different from them swinging monkeys the moment i cld say "mama". You mean it took the scientists so long to figure that out?

Put a human and a monkey side by side -- it shldnt take a rocket scientist to figure out something's not the same. duhhhhh...

Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

 

[wblastyn]

Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Couldn't this be turned around on you, since you think you know better (or are more "wise") than scientists who work in evolutionary biology, geology, physics, etc.

Science isn't so simple that a layman can easily debunk it. In chemistry we were learning about Nuclear Magnetic Radioscopy (NMR - nucleus spin effected by magnetic fields, shielding from neighbouring electrons and electronegative electrons, etc). I found it difficult to understand (although the real scientists here probably have no problem) and I couldn't understand how anyone was intelligent enough to come up with such an idea. I wouldn't even try to debunk it (not that it really could be, it's just an example) because I know next to nothing about it and I barely understand it.

The same applies to evolution, it isn't as simple as you might think and I don't know how you can go around saying "uh evolution, what rubbish" when you probably know next to nothing about it and/or barely understand it.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Isn't it intellectually dishonest to be commenting - and expressing opinions - on an article that one has not even read in detail?

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

I wouldn't call it dishonest unless the person claims to have the read the article. If there are no such claims, commenting is merely foolish.

 

[Follower of Christ]

7th March 2003 at 11:10 PM Andrew said this in Post #3



boy, somehow I knew I was different from them swinging monkeys the moment i cld say "mama". You mean it took the scientists so long to figure that out?

Put a human and a monkey side by side -- it shldnt take a rocket scientist to figure out something's not the same. duhhhhh...

Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

The one that gets me is their ''Mitochondrial Eve''
Yes, it appears we may have a common ancestrial mother.

Of course, I would like to see a little more information on her.
They are quickly trying to cover thier tracks with this one

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Mitochondrial Eve is supposed to have lived 200 thousand years ago, and she is certainly NOT considered to have been the ONLY female on earth at the time. There was a population of humans living over a large area of East Africa at this time, however only one lineage is still alive today - and there could very well have been many males with which she produced offspring. At least according to that theory.

There is also supposed to have been a "y chromosome Adam" who lived 30 to 40 thousand years ago in East Africa.

 

[Follower of Christ]

The point being that, as far as I have studied this, EVERYONE can be linked to her genetically.
If you have something that contradicts this, I would love to take a look at it.

As for 200,000 years, that is ''speculation'' based on genetic mutation. Unprovable.

 

[notto]

Today at 07:29 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #10



The point being that, as far as I have studied this, EVERYONE can be linked to her genetically.
If you have something that contradicts this, I would love to take a look at it.

As for 200,000 years, that is ''speculation'' based on genetic mutation. Unprovable.

Everyone who is currently ALIVE can be linked to her (and she is hypothetical). Not everyone who has ever lived. There is a difference. ME can change hands based on extinction of groups of people. When the current ME (the definition of ME is that she is the MOST CURRENT common ancester through the matrinal line) was alive, she was not the ME. When she was alive, one of her ancestors would have been the ME.

You cannot build a family tree that only links back to her as a lone women mating with a lone man unless you can trace the genetics of the male side of this equation back to a lone man of the same time(unless Adam sinned with another women - this is why we don't have to go back as far for y-chomosome adam, males would mate with more than one woman)

It is also possible that the hypotetical eve would could change hands in the future based on populations dieing out. Based on the mathematics that are used to determine when the hypothetical eve lived, it is also possible that in the future, these mathematics will point to someone else (possibly someone who is alive today).

The ME theory also makes an assumption that mitochondrial dna can only come from the maternal side of the equation. Recent studies have shown that this may not be the case.

There are also studies of X-Chromosome Eve (different dna than mitochondrial dna) that point to a different hypothetical ancestor of a different time than mictochondrial eve. This is why it is important to understand that ME, Y-chromosome adam, and X-chromosome eve only point to the MOST RECENT ancestor of those LIVING today. If this was a lone, common set of ancestors, all 3 of these studies of DNA would point to the same time, expecially mitochondrial eve and X-Chromosome eve. This is not the case.

 

[Follower of Christ]

I havent studied this one out yet, so I cannot get into a long debate about ME yet.

After looking at a couple articles, I just thought it was kind of funny.

I think I will spend a little time with this one.